Jeff Faraudo

Post navigation

Now if we can get the run game up to par we’ll be in business! Go Bears!

Daniel

Nice to see adjustments when one thing isn’t working. I’ve missed those.

wehofx

Great SD quote from presser:

“We are used to making comebacks. Our teams always play hard; that is a trademark of our teams. What they will learn is that they are never out of the ballgame; we’ll pull some rabbits out of a hat. We told them to believe in what they are doing and learn from everything. We had 99 plays, and there is something to learn in every one of them. We’ll be a lot better football team next Saturday.”

GoBears91

So refreshing. On the one hand, it’s disappointing we couldn’t run the ball. On the other hand, it’s so nice that we made adjustments and designed pass plays that worked. In recent years, we would just run the ball on 1st and 2nd down and then have an incompletion on 3rd and 8…

707 Bear

Here I go again…

Anyone out there concerned that teenagers/20 somethings are facing 99 plays per game? The Bears ran 99 plays!

For perspective, in the 2013 NFC Championship game, the 49ers and Falcons ran 51 and 66 plays.

Anyone want to volunteer their son to play nose guard against these hurry-up offenses?

Don’t give me the “well they should just sub more often” line. They can’t sub, that’s the whole point of the hurry up.

Tired kids will get injured more often.

Not sure what to do, but college defenses should not have to face 100% more plays than the pros.

Go Bears!

Bigdruid

They can sub out between series. And it’s not like we complete every pass.

As for tired kids getting injured… I’m unconvinced. Do you have any stats? Do significantly more injuries happen in the 4th quarter?

707 Bear

Bigdruid

The NCAA already has a rule to reduce the total number of plays that players will face: Teams are required to go for two points after the second–I think–overtime.

This rule acknowledges there should be some limit to the number of collisions these student athletes face in order to entertain us on Saturdays.

And with tens of millions at stake for coaches, are you so sure that the players’ health is the first priority?

Mr. B

@707:
I am not attacking a fellow BEAR, but I think there’s some kinda faulty logic there in #7…

Tons of potential reasons or intents behind that rule mandating the 2-pt conversion after multiple OTs.

Main one being, “Get this game over and declare a winner. NCAA don’t like tie scores.”

Sure, Included in that is the goal of ending the game after a reasonable amount of time (number of plays?) But it’s not like the rule making committee intended to limit the number of collisions when adopting that rule – it may be one consideration to limit the number of plays that players will face – but it is not the sole consideration.

If that were the sole consideration, the rule would likely be more directed at the specific issue – the # of plays – and would introduce some sort of play counter, like the pitch counter they use in little league.

People got all freaked out when the forward pass was introduced. People getting all freaked out about up-tempo is kinda the same, IMHO.